I agree. we do not need violence. we are not being ridiculously oppressed by the government and therefore there is no need for us to start a revolution for no reason.

Besides, we're getting new president, and who knows, things might turn for the better [;

A revolution in a halfway distracted society is just an isolated act of domestic terrorism.

This is one of the wisest points I've seen in a long time. Write more of this.

Let's go be citizens. I want to be able to say that I've done something.

I didn't think people would take me seriously and i didn't want the NSA after me ;)

Great post, but I feel some more of these should be checked.

1. People from all social classes are discontented

Bush still "only" has a 71% disapproval rating. There are still people who like what he's doing. I don't think 1 should be checked, but I also don't think it should be a requisite for revolution. I don't think it's possible for all social classes to be discontent.

4. People are beginning to think of themselves as belonging to a social class, and there is a growing bitterness between social classes

This is arguably true. Do you feel you can relate to CEO's, Senators, etc? Like they are working for your interests? That's a tiny slice of society, but it's technically a social class. And the wealth gap is only growing. What about rednecks and gangsters? Wouldn't you say there's growing enmity from the middle class against them?

5. The social classes closest to one another are the most hostile.

Look at Los Angeles: Black and Latino gangs are killing each other all the time. Unfortunately, they're not shooting up Beverly Hills. I can't say my knowledge of classes is detailed enough to give an educated answer to this. It's probably easiest if people present their own (counter)examples, because I can't think of much. but I'm inclined to check #5.

6. The scholars and thinkers give up on the way their society operates.

Shit, I couldn't provide the links, but I've read plenty of scholars who say a democracy constituted of uneducated pop-culture zombies isn't the way to go.

7. The government does not respond to the needs of its society

√√√√√

8. The leaders of the government and the ruling class begin to doubt themselves. Some join with the opposition groups

I haven't seen any of this. Examples?

9. The government is unable to get enough support from any group to save itself.

K, I don't think Brinton thought through this list that much.

10. The government cannot organize its finances correctly and is either going bankrupt or trying to tax heavily and unjustly.

Well, Brad, by some accounts our currency is collapsing. Even if it's not, I believe this has been some of the fastest inflation in American history, these past 8 years. I'm wondering if this isn't some kind of strategy, though, because no government is incompetent enough to handle things this badly, in light of this much evidence. Perhaps our collapsing currency will pull the rug out from under our enemies, who depend on it? It's possible our own recovery would be faster. But it's also very likely that even if this is an intentional maneuver, only the top 2% would be left unfazed.

I'm all about more taxes too, as a side note. Somehow they've become a dirty word in America, and that's how we've been left in the dust in education and health care; meanwhile, the countries with the highest tax rates have not only the highest standards of living, but the happiest people. When our public arena of debate doesn't consider that the utmost measure of a country's success, we're being lied to for someone else's profit.

2. Unsuccessful government attempts to suppress revolutionaries.

Explain? I haven't seen any serious attempts on the parts of revolutionaries. But I have seen the FALCON raids, and Halliburton's nationwide detention facilities being built. They're prepared for suppression; revolutionaries are not.

We'll see a few years after Oboma..............[ ]

This will not be a revolution. Obama would not have gotten as far as he did without being corporate-approved. He will be more of the same, in a different style. His "change" is mostly a token gesture. Expect disappointment in results and intent.

Now I'm confused, is this the Bush Administration?..............[√?]

Actually, that comment says more than you probably think. In a sense, if any revolution has taken place, it was done by Bush's admin and its backers. Not all revolutions are popular, or for the people. Although I guess this is more of a political coup.

7. A strong man emerges and assumes great power

Wait, and then this is... Obama?.............[√?]

Nope, still Bush.

8. The extremists try to create a "heaven on earth" by introducing their whole program and by punishing all their opponents.

Obama's "change"... and trials of Bush for war crimes?..........[√?]

Firing attorneys who challenge the GOP? This is Bush again.

9. A period of terror occurs.

eh.......idk....................[ ]

This is now. It began with the terrorist attacks. Let's forget who's behind it, that's moot at this point. What matters is that the threat of further attacks has fueled a lot of leniency for the past few years' changes. The period of terror, or "evoking a terrifying internal or external enemy" (Die Juden, the Commies, or the A-rab tairists) is a major symptom of fascism.

"Too long; Didn't read:" First we should recognize that a revolution has already occurred, in a sense. Corporate interests have turned our government into a money-laundering operation. In simplest terms: take over the government, create allies in the military-industrial complex and the Federal Reserve. Create ass-loads of money, and funnel it into the war machine. Defense contractors and oil barons profit insanely, ahead the speed of monetary inflation. As a result, the rich are richer, we are poorer.

Well, my point is a bit more complex than this. Perhaps I'll write more if prompted, but for now I'm done.

I only favor your argument because I like those check boxes. How did you do that?